Microsoft is
sounding
an alarm over the Google/Yahoo ad deal, calling it a monopoly in the making.
Coming from Microsoft, this might be ironic -- but not that surprising:
Ironic? No, it's about time. Turnabout is fair play.
-Anonymous
This is just as ironic as when IBM got to finger-pointing at Microsoft
during the Microsoft monopoly hearings. Youngsters might not remember IBM's
own monopoly issues, but the rest of us do.
-Stan
What goes around comes around. I think Microsoft is justified using the
same arguments that have been used against it -- and the results should be
the same if the legal systems are balanced as they claim.
-Anonymous
Microsoft's enemies have used the monopoly chip against them and now they
want to turn the tables on Google. Having politicians and the courts involved
in this is not good for the consumer's pocket book or for technology innovation.
I trust the market to make the corrections needed.
-Tom
After reading your comments about Microsoft, the potential Google/Yahoo
deal and the words "monopoly" and "ironic" in your column,
another word immediately came to my mind: HYPOCRITE. Kind of like the pot
calling the kettle black. Just like a terrorist calling the United States
a bunch of murderers. Kinda of like sending a fat, overweight U.S. senator
overseas to a Third World nation to investigate their poverty and hunger.
Tennessee Williams said it best in "The Rose Tattoo," Act 3: "The
only thing worse than a liar is a liar that's also a hypocrite!"
How long before we see Microsoft changing its trademark to a guy wearing
a black hat, a tuxedo and a monocle?
-Les
Microsoft has suggested that Windows 7 will pretty much be based
on Vista. Too much of a not-so-good-thing? Here's what some of you think:
Over the last months, I have read several news reports saying that Windows
7 will address the 'bloatware' that Vista has become by being more of a thin
client that can be readily expanded. Now Veghte is saying it will be built
on Vista? Did those reporters fall for more obfuscation?
As the world swings toward making more use of laptops and notebooks,
Microsoft must understand that these devices are NOT readily upgradeable to
have terabytes of RAM once Windows 7 releases. I have an old Dell Latitude
at home that I'm not throwing away just because it can't support Vista; I'm
moving to Ubuntu.
-Ian
I think that Microsoft made a major stumble at the wrong time. Vista was
way late and many of the great features were stripped in order to finally
ship it. It was so slow and riddled with bugs and incompatibilities that it
got extremely bad press. At the same time, Linux was making huge strides in
compatibility and ease of use with Ubuntu, etc. A couple years ago, Linux
wasn't in a place to compete at any level with Windows, but now it is much
further along.
Microsoft making a big announcement that Windows 7 is based on Vista
so you might as well upgrade to Vista now is going to backfire on the company,
I think.
-Matt
I saw in your post today that you included some Windows 7 information,
and I wanted to clarify a minor point. In your post, you write the following:
"Second -- and this is the first such official proclamation -- Veghte
stated that Windows 7 is based on Vista."
There was a post
by Chris Flores on the Windows Vista blog in May which disclosed this information.
-Mary
Rick shares his thoughts on Microsoft's approach
to standards:
I work in a part of the technology sector where collaboration and cooperation
are essential. In my opinion, Microsoft sets itself up for the cheap shots
in the manner it tries to collaborate or share with the technology community
at large. It's one thing to invite the technology community to participate
in the creation of a file standard, as opposed to developing a file standard
and presenting it to the technology community for ratification or acceptance.
The first approach is inviting and suggests willingness to accept outside
review and input; the latter is easily construed as an obnoxious attitude
("Here it is, take it or leave it").
Still, a powerful argument against collaboration is that development
speed suffers dramatically. Also in the mix is the fact that system changes
are best made in the design phase and not the implementation phase. So when
a non-Microsoft entity makes a valid observation or suggestion, Microsoft
can ignore it on the grounds that it would be too costly to implement, opening
itself up to criticism.
-Rick
Robert is still wondering about Diane Greene's unexpected
departure from VMware:
Seems to me that EMC overlooked a significant factor in that by letting
Greene go, users who were accepting of VMware as "the best game in town"
are now going to say, "Hmm, guess I should look at Microsoft and Xen
and etc." The old law of unintended consequences may really come to bear.
-Robert
And Charlie gets the final word (hopefully) on the Nick
Hogan hate-train:
I agree with you -- Nick Hogan is a dirt bag. Here's a rule of thumb:
There are no real heroes on "reality" TV. Most all of the participants
are either losers, wannabes, has-beens or, as you put it, dirt bags.
-Charlie
Tell us what you think! Leave a message below or send an e-mail to [email protected].
Posted by Doug Barney on 07/17/2008 at 1:15 PM0 comments
Cloud computing may not take over our entire world of computing, but it's clearly
going to represent a large chunk of how we conduct business. And that has some
rather huge
security
implications.
For one, all these service companies need to ensure that their software --
and your data -- is safe. This means that the security software market is going
to be less about anti-virus on your PC and more about anti-hacker on huge server
farms.
There may be an upside to this. It just may be easier to secure a service provider's
infrastructure than it is to lock down hundreds and thousands of systems that
may be scattered throughout your enterprise. If that's true, our data may ultimately
be more secure in the cloud.
Of course, when you shift computing models, you also need to shift how you
secure it all. In this case, securing browsers and network connections is key,
as is locking down passwords and, as always, protecting data on local systems,
whether it comes from a cloud or not.
Is the cloud more or less secure? Answers welcome at [email protected].
Meanwhile, I got a great letter from Andrew in response to an item about whether
Microsoft will be as powerful in the cloud as it is in packaged apps:
"In today's article titled 'Microsoft
and the Cloud: The Desmond Perspective,' you raise the question whether
Microsoft can move from a maker of packaged software to a services company.
What a lot folks don't look at or bring into the discussion is that in fact,
Microsoft has made this possible for years through subscription licensing.
Partners such as ourselves have been offering Microsoft software in the cloud
for quite some time. The only difference now is that they are working to have
their own offerings.
Being one of those providers, we know that it will be quite some time
before their direct offering will have the full capabilities that many of
their partners are already able to provide. For example, we provide SharePoint
as both a WSS and MOSS offering today through one of our divisions (http://www.sharepointhosting.com/).
Today, we have over 1,000 current SharePoint customers and growing exponentially.
A number of these are Fortune 100 companies running mission-critical sites.
When you add in the other clients that have used our services for more limited
needs such as pilots, temporary project sites, etc., that number equals over
3,000 customers that we have worked with.
Microsoft has quite often looked to their partner community to lead the
charge and we are right out there on the front lines!"
Posted by Doug Barney on 07/17/2008 at 1:15 PM0 comments
There's an old story about economics that I think my dad once told me. It seems
that Smirnoff vodka was losing market share to its lower-priced rival, Wolfschmidt,
back in the '60s. Instead of slashing its prices to match those of Wolfschmidt,
Smirnoff did something no one expected: It raised 'em. All of a sudden, Smirnoff
was a premium brand, and sales rose.
Apparently, VMware is the Smirnoff to Hyper-V's Wolfschmidt. Over in Europe,
VMware
is raising prices, at the exact same time that a nearly free Hyper-V is
coming to market.
That may work for a while, but in the long run, VMware is going to have to
react to Hyper-V pricing. Look at what happened with Netscape. It kept charging
for its browser even as IE was free. Hmm, didn't the Netscape browser business
ultimately disappear?
What would you do if you ran VMware? Send your corporate tactics to [email protected].
Posted by Doug Barney on 07/17/2008 at 1:15 PM0 comments
The Apple crowd is a pretty loyal lot. These are the folks that line up whenever
there's a hot new Mac, iPhone or Steve Jobs sighting.
One TV reporter, though, mistook this crowd for the Dungeons & Dragons-type
folks that camp out waiting for the next PlayStation or Nintendo. This TV reporter
thought Apple fans were pimple-faced losers with no social skills -- and no
guts.
But when he asked, on camera, a bunch of folks standing in line for the new
iPhone if they had ever kissed a girl, he got completely owned by one dude.
This guy coolly explained how uncool it was to assume that iPhone fans were
a bunch of dweebs. After this got posted
on YouTube, I'm sure this guy has plenty of interested gals.
Posted by Doug Barney on 07/17/2008 at 1:15 PM0 comments
Michael Desmond is editor in chief of
Redmond
Developer News, our magazine for corporate development managers (we
also own
Visual
Studio Magazine).
Last week, Mr. Desmond tackled
an issue we've been talking about here: whether Microsoft can move from
a maker of packaged software to a services company. And like this here Redmond
Report, the real insight came from readers.
In Desmond's case, several developers made a strong case for why Microsoft
will have trouble adapting to cloud computing. They had me convinced -- until
a reader who goes by "smehaffie" argued that Microsoft can sit back
and watch this whole area evolve while it quietly crafts a killer cloud solution.
Desmond isn't buying smehaffie's argument, but I might be!
Posted by Doug Barney on 07/16/2008 at 1:15 PM0 comments
\Alanis Morrissette made the word "ironic" famous in her song "Isn't
It Ironic?" Well, Microsoft may be the black fly in Google and Yahoo's
chardonnay as Redmond is trying to get the U.S. Congress to put the kibosh on
the Google/Yahoo ad deal. According to Microsoft, the deal would
create
a monopoly in Web ads, as the duo would control some 90 percent of the market.
Here's the ironic(al) part. Microsoft has been trying to buy Yahoo and ultimately
wants to corner that same market. And what kind of share does Microsoft have
in desktop operating systems, productivity suites and browsers? Isn't that ironic,
don't you think?
What do you think? Shoot your thoughts, ironic or not, to [email protected].
Posted by Doug Barney on 07/16/2008 at 1:15 PM0 comments
On the topic of Microsoft's OOXML file format, Angus has an interesting question:
How is OOXML a standard when even Microsoft's own Office suite does not
yet fully support it?
-Angus
In the wake of the WSUS glitch that Microsoft eventually fixed, Doug asked
readers whether they value a patch's stability more than its speed. Most of
you went with the former:
Stability, of course. Does it matter if a hacker brings down your server
or a Microsoft patch does it for them? If the data isn't available, it's useless.
-LouAnne
With patches, as with medical interventions, the primary guidance lies
in the injunction: "First, do no harm."
-Fred
I will take stability over speed.
-Mark
The stability is more important. Their newest version of Explorer has
now locked me and others from accessing a file we need to do our job. I am
the administrator for the file but don't have access to the file.
They sent a fix to the problem a year ago, but it still hasn't fixed
the problem. To access any file I need, I have go to Explorer to retrieve
any of the my documents. If I try "save as" or change the drive
in the program, all the files I have in that program freeze and I lose data.
Which also means I can't repair my Access database as it means I have be able
to select a drive.
-Ruth
Here are some of your responses to our recent question about what you'd like
to see in the pages of Redmond magazine:
Since my world is centered around Dynamics GP, I would like to see more
about the Dynamics product line and Great Plains in particular and the blending
of that world with the Microsoft stack.
-Ronald
I find the most useful types of articles are overviews of new Microsoft
products, where an article of two to 10 pages describes a new product, explains
what hardware and software is required, walks you through a basic installation,
and mentions common configuration mistakes.
The second most useful article to me are those describing methods of
automating common network management tasks, whether this be through scripting
or a Microsoft or third-party management product. Finally, I would really
like to see a series of articles on how to secure various Microsoft products
-- how to secure an IIS installation, how to secure a SQL installation, etc.
I realise space is limited, so I'm just talking about a two-page article with
bullet points and an overview, rather than an in-depth "War and Peace"-type
article."
-Mark
Finally, Brad minces some of our words:
In your newsletter you state: "Say what you will about the folks
in Redmond, I've never seen them all erratic and unpredictable. In fact, every
time I've seen the company act erratic, it was part of a greater plan."
OK, you've never seen Microsoft be erratic and unpredictable, but every
time it was part of a greater plan? If you've never seen them be erratic,
there is no "every time"!
-Brad
Tell us what you think! Leave a comment below or send an e-mail to [email protected].
Posted by Doug Barney on 07/16/2008 at 1:15 PM0 comments
Citrix this week announced "
Project
Kensho" (which is a Zen term referring to one's initial enlightenment),
a set of tools that should make your choice of hypervisor, as Dr. Evil might
say, "inconsequential."
Kensho tools take advantage of Open Virtual Format (OVF), a standard that lets
IT and application makers build virtual machines that run independent of the
hypervisor. This way, a VM could be easily moved from VMware to Xen to Hyper-V.
Here's how Simon Crosby, Citrix CTO, described Kensho in a recent
blog:
"Kensho will allow application vendors and IT users to produce virtual
appliances once as 'golden application templates,' independent of the virtualization
platform used to deploy them -- and is a clear demonstration of how Citrix
will add value to Hyper-V."
Another advantage of Kensho? It will eventually let Microsoft System Center
VMM manage other hypervisors such as XenServer. Microsoft has got to love that.
With this kind of interop, does the hypervisor even matter? What do you think,
and what is your favorite virtual tool? Answers welcome at [email protected].
Posted by Doug Barney on 07/16/2008 at 1:15 PM0 comments
SQL Server 2008 is nearly here, and it's still 2008! Microsoft says the software
will
be released to manufacturing by the end of September, and then out to customers
a short time later.
I poke fun, but on the server side Microsoft has been hitting its dates pretty dang well. Hyper-V was even early.
We took a look at the database tool, formerly code-named "Katmai" (which is a volcano in Alaska), and found SQL Server 2008 to have tighter integration with Visual Studio, and more ways to deal with alternative types of data, such as music and video clips.
We also took a peek at SQL Server 2008's admin features, finding that its new admin framework can have a big, positive impact on performance.
Posted by Doug Barney on 07/15/2008 at 1:15 PM0 comments
This spring, Microsoft's Office Open XML file format was approved as an ISO standard. But not all were pleased. Several countries -- Venezuela, Brazil, India and South Africa -- all objected and filed appeals. Now an
ISO document has emerged that points to those appeals falling on deaf (or at least disinterested) ears.
When it comes to standards, Microsoft is darned if it does, and danged is it doesn't. For years Microsoft has been bashed for not doing enough to support existing standards, and even less to offer its own technologies to standards bodies. So when Microsoft offers its Office file formats, the critics complain that the process was flawed. I'm glad to that ISO appears to be making the right choice here.
What would you want to see done with the file format? Is Microsoft doing a
good job supporting standards? Shoot your ideas to me at [email protected].
Posted by Doug Barney on 07/15/2008 at 1:15 PM0 comments
You would think that when billions of dollars are at stake, the stake holders would all have their stories straight. But Yahoo and Microsoft have
very different versions of what led to the offer Microsoft made to acquire Yahoo's search business.
The offer was made on Friday and fairly promptly rejected by the Yahoo-ites. This surprised Microsoft, which claims that the chairman of the Yahoo board, Roy Bostock, solicited the offer. After receiving the offer that Bostock allegedly asked for, called Microsoft's behavior "erratic and unpredictable."
Say what you will about the folks in Redmond, I've never seen them all erratic and unpredictable. In fact, every time I've seen the company act erratic, it was part of a greater plan.
What is your sense of Microsoft's behavior, especially since Gates has steadily
given up power? Your thoughts welcome at [email protected].
Posted by Doug Barney on 07/15/2008 at 1:15 PM0 comments
A few months back when we wrote our cover story about
Microsoft possibly buying Yahoo, we knew it would be a long slog and the deal may never happen. We wrote the story anyway, analyzing what
would happen
if Microsoft bought Yahoo.
The on-again, off-again deal is still on-or-off, but one thing we know for sure is that Microsoft is changing the terms. In an offer made this weekend -- which Yahoo rejected -- instead of paying $33 billion for the whole kit and kaboodle (that would be a good name for an Internet company, instead of Googling, you could Kaboodle), Ballmer now wants just the search part -- for $1 billion. You mean to tell me that Yahoo search is only 1/33 of the value of the entire company? Of course, Ballmer promised some future payments and would even loan Yahoo a billion or two at 5 percent interest.
If such a deal were to happen, the rest of Yahoo would go to Carl Icahn, who has messed up a company or two in his time (such as TWA), as he tends to rip out all the parts of value. Lately, though, Icahn has been putting wobbly companies back on solid footing -- a nice change of pace.
Yahoo, for its part, seems confused. There are reports that it wants to go back to the $33 billion offer that is off the table. At the same time, some Yahoo-ians are accusing Microsoft of meddling, trying to create a new Yahoo board (for a company Microsoft doesn't own) and break up Yahoo (which it is also clearly trying to do).
Google CEO Eric Schmidt is solidly in Yahoo's corner. Schmidt, who is cutting an ad deal with Yahoo, said he believes Yahoo should remain independent. I get the feeling Schmidt doesn't want any more competition from Microsoft.
Posted by Doug Barney on 07/14/2008 at 1:15 PM0 comments